Schmidt v. State

ORDER IMPOSING SANCTIONS

The court sua sponte directed Appellant to show cause why sanctions should not be imposed against him for his continued filing of frivolous pro se motions. Appellant has failed to timely respond to the show cause order. The records of the court reflect that Appellant has appeared as an appellant or petitioner approximately forty-six times since 1994. We conclude that Appellant’s excessive filings in this court substantially interfere with the administration of justice and we elect to impose sanctions against Appellant. See Brown v. State, 27 So.3d 63 (Fla. 1st DCA…